Skip to main content

tv   Countdown With Keith Olbermann  MSNBC  August 4, 2010 1:00am-2:00am EDT

1:00 am
thanks for being with us. "countdown with keith olbermann" starts night now. which of these stories will you be talking about tomorrow? hearings into repealing the 14th amendment proposed by senate minority leader mcconnell. house gop pushes a repeal bill as republican willingness to stoke hatred, fear, racism is pushed to the forefront. >> birthright citizenship, i think, is a mistake. that we should change our constitution. >> if both parents are here illegally, should there be a reward for their illegal behavior? >> jonathan turley on the law. maria teresa kumar of voto latino on the hate. ethics in the house, if any. eight investigations of representatives. all eight just happened to be african-american. and the head of the independent body that refers the cases to the house ethics committee is porter goss. the bush cia director who
1:01 am
approved the destruction of the torture videotapes. gene robinson joins us. day 106. the figure on the possible fines, $17,600,000,000. and a question about this. is this a rerun? tea time. the liberty leaders fife and drum duo split up because the fife player doesn't think the drummer is conservative enough. the drummer got pete bested. and sharron's new obtuse angle. >> we needed to have the press be our friend. >> hold on, wait a second. to be your friend? >> we wanted them to ask the questions we want answered so they report the news the way we wanted it to be reported. >> the candidate believes in a free press, made up of stenographers. all the news and commentary now on "countdown". >> will they let me say that?
1:02 am
good evening from new york. the senate republican leader says he wants to hold hearings on repealing the 14th amendment, one of the most important foundations of american civil rights. our fifth story tonight, once more, in case you couldn't believe i just said that out loud, the leader of the republican party in the u.s. senate wants to hold hearings on repealing one of the constitutional amendments that his own party put in place after the civil war to prevent former confederate states from discriminating against former slaves. . literally, to return us to the days of the dred scott decision. last week, republican senator lindsey graham suggested repealing the 14th amendment, which establishes citizenship for anyone born in the u.s., except in cases, such as children of foreign diplomats or of enemy soldiers. the goal, to stop illegal immigrants from coming into the u.s., to have their children born here as citizens. on sunday, senate republican whip jon kyl lent his support to
1:03 am
graham's proposal. >> there is a movement afoot to rescind the law that makes anyone born in the united states a u.s. citizen, specifically aimed at the children of illegal immigrants. do you support that? >> well, actually, there is a constitutional provision in the 14th amendment that has been interpreted to provide that if you are born in the united states, you are a citizen, no matter what. and what i suggested to my colleague lindsey graham from south carolina, suggested that we pursue that. and what i suggested to him was that we should hold some hearings and hear first from the constitutional experts to at least tell us what the state of the law in that proposition is. >> a spokesman for kyl's boss, mitch mcconnell, told "huffington post" last night, he supports hearings on the issue. mcconnell now confirming this to "the hill" newspaper, but john mccain, who's running for re-election this year with less hispanic support than he has enjoyed in the past seemed less than eager to respond to this today.
1:04 am
>> senator mccain, i also have a question on the 14th amendment. senator kyl -- >> we're talking about the stimulus right now. thanks very much. >> reporters chased him to the elevator. he still refused to answer. they found him again in the basement. no, i'm not exaggerating, in the basement. and talking points memo asked if he agrees with mcconnell, the quote was, i support the concept of holding hearings. you may remember senator kyl earlier this year went after elena kagan for her admire ration of thurgood marshall, saying marshall's philosophy was outside the mainstream. and the only brown anyone produced seemed to be brown v. board of education, he argued to the court against racial segregation of schools. so now senator kyl with the support of the senate republican leader wants to repeal the amendment that gave freed slaves and their descendents american citizenship. senator coburn, meanwhile, claiming the lawmakers of 1868 never meant for the children of nonresidents to be citizens.
1:05 am
he's entirely wrong. the 14th amendment was ratified in part to undo the supreme court's most infamous ruling, dred scott, which denied citizenship to the freed slaves and to their descendents. in the debate before ratification, senator john conness of california was asked, quote, is the child of the chinese immigrant a citizen? conness said, yes. the supreme court agreed, ruling decades later that anti-chinese laws violated the 14th amendment. but this is not really just lindsey graham's idea, nor that new. the republican party platform of 1996 stated, "we support a constitutional amendment declaring that children born in the united states to parents who are not legally present in the united states are not automatically citizens." that plank of the platform came from a recommendation by a panel on immigration, 47 republicans and seven democrats and it was created by then-house speaker newt gingrich. let's turn first to jonathan turley, professor of constitutional law at george washington university school of law. john, thanks for your time
1:06 am
tonight. >> thank you very much. >> all right. so he said, kyl said, we should hold some hearings and hear first from the constitutional experts to at least tell us what the state of the law on that proposition is. go. >> well, the state of the law is pretty clear, as to the meaning of the 14th amendment. the supreme court has stated in cases like pyler and other cases that there is this presumption that children born to illegal aliens are citizens. now, it's true that that was in the holding of the decision, but the overwhelming weight of the authority is that it is included. this is the very first line of the very first section of the 14th amendment. and it has historically been interpreted exactly this way. and it is interesting, as you say, i remember when i graduated law school a long time ago, we sat around and complained that all of the great legal issues had been debated and resolved before we became lawyers. i never thought we'd be going back to the 1860s and starting again.
1:07 am
but apparently we are. >> so if you're a strict constitutionalist and you're the one who believes -- if you're the strict constitutionalist and you believe, literally, to interpret what is in the constitution and there is no way -- >> i'm sorry, keith, we cut out. >> can john hear me? john? stand by. we'll see if we can fix this and we'll move ahead to our second guest. john turley will stand by. we'll see if we can fix this up here. we'll turn now to maria teresa kumar, also the executive director of the nonpartisan group, voto-latino. which is devoted to increasing civic involvement by latino youth. thanks for your time tonight. and sorry about the abrupt introduction. senate republican leadership, the last republican presidential candidate, that's a large group already, pushing for hearings on the 14th amendment, including the possible repeal of it or some sort of reinterpretation of what is plain english, to use an appropriate phrase. what are the politics of this? what is the goal of this? can it succeed? >> this is absolute nonsense. basically, the republican leadership has basically had to
1:08 am
deal with comprehensive immigration reform for the last ten years are saying, you know what, we don't have the answers, we don't know how to fix the borders so let's go after the kids. what is that? that's the lack of leadership and unfortunately it's detrimental and divisive when we need unity. >> so republicans are going after latinos and targeting an amendment that they wrote to protect black people. is the gop now openly saying, hey, scared white folks, we're your home, we won't judge you, we won't tell you that you're being paranoid. we have a place for you to come over and be fearful and judgmental. is that what it boils down to? >> i think most americans actually sniff that out. what i think that they're trying to do, they're hoping to win an election in the midterms that they know that they can't, number one. but number two, they're constitutionalists. they actually believe in the letter of the law. why are the republicans picking and choosing which laws they're going to follow? that goes against their base and their ideology.
1:09 am
it doesn't make any sense. >> john mccain was born in panama. he's covered by the fact that that was a u.s. territory at that point. but mitt romney's father was born in mexico, to which his grandfather had fled with people who didn't like polygamy following him. then he fled mexico, because there was violence in mexico and he wanted to come home to some place safe. if we open up the "who's really born american" question, don't we have to really open the "who's born american" question and include children of american parents who happen to be in stockholm for the weekend and she goes into labor prematurely? how far does this go, and does it go in directions that republicans don't see? >> my first question to mccain and romney is, how's their spanish? but in all seriousness, the idea of where's the slippery slope, we have five million of the undocumented are children, that for all intents and purposes, they believe that they are american, except for that little piece of paper. so what are we going to do with their aspirations and their belief in the american system when we marginalize them.
1:10 am
what we can't do is do what germany did. they give the turks working visas, but never allowed their children to become u.s. citizens, and now all of a sudden there's a huge population in germany of folks that are stateless. that's not what america is about. >> the origins of this, as i read from the newt gingrich part of the platform in 1996, it suggests this is not part of the cyclical process that we see. find a scapegoat, whoever they are. my ancestors, your ancestors. whoever it happens to be. the least protected in the system at the moment. it suggests it's not even blowback to the obama election and other civil rights game and the more prominent role of hispanic politicians in this country in the last ten years. if it's not that, what is it? what has incited this, in particular, now? >> i think right now, our country's at a cross roads and americans of all ethnicities are hurting. the economy's bad, we can't find jobs, and we still fear national security. what is it? let's go to the scapegoat.
1:11 am
it's easy politics, but it's not leadership. >> as we were discussing before the show started, is it a design to campaign on the, we tried, but we failed. because they know it can't work? >> they're scapegoats, but they realize they don't have leadership right now, so they're trying to find the lowest denominator in politics and that's divisive politics and that's not where the american people want to go. they want people in congress, both democrats and republicans to roll up their sleeves and actually get some work done. >> maria teresa kumar, nbc and voto latino, good to see you again. thanks for coming in. let's pick up that interview with jonathan turley as we've connected the two juice cans and the string again. john, you made a great point about this and the debate, or your belief in law school that there were no great constitutional issues left to debate. if you're a strict constitutionalist, as the republicans claim to be, as the tea partiers claim to be, what's more unreadable between the lines than the 14th amendment? >> well, i think that's right.
1:12 am
actually, the language of the 14th amendment seems pretty clear on the issue. there's some debate when it talks about being under the jurisdiction of the united states, but the text itself heavily supports the argument that these children are citizens. i expect a challenge to that, if they passed a law that sought to change that meaning, would lose in front of the supreme court. also, historically, you know, in england, in 1608, in a case called calvin's case, the english courts said quite clearly that if you're born within a king's dominion, you're entitled to the king's protection and the king's entitled to your loyalty. and so there was a history for what's called law of the ground, or the right of blood. as we've always had this view that it was the fact this law of the ground. and after all, in the united states, we are a nation of immigrants. so it fit very well with our overall perspective as a new nation. >> what is the -- what are the implications -- are there
1:13 am
precedents, in fact, in that senate debate that we quoted from, when which the senator from california was asked, does that mean the son of the chinese immigrant is an american, and he went, yes. does that have legal standing? does the fact that the debate that preceded the 14th amendment is clear and recorded. does that mean anything in this equation? >> it does. to be fair to the other side, there have been academics that have argued that those debates have senators saying, quite the opposite. most importantly, jacob howard, who was author of the amendment, makes a statement on the floor where he says, this would exclude foreigners and aliens. so the legislative history is very, very mixed in terms of what the meaning was. but you also have to remember, the 14th amendment, it wasn't simply after dred scott to reverse that horrible decision, but it also came as a response to what were called the black codes, which are enacted in the south. and these referenced to
1:14 am
disenfranchised blacks, and that analogy could be made in many ways to the illegal immigrants. but the supreme court itself in the case i mentioned earlier, it strongly suggested that their view was that the language of the 14th amendment did embrace the children of illegal aliens. what we did not want in this country is to face something like what germany has. germany has a great number of stateless people, particularly turks. that creates great harm and some instability for that country. and the united states has a very important debate to have here. it's not that there isn't a basis for the argument on the other side, but there are very important social and constitutional arguments against the positions stated today. >> yeah. what happens to those kids if they're not americans and we're going to throw them out, or more importantly, what happens to them if they stay? which is a great point to be examined in length at another time when we get you on for
1:15 am
three separate interviews, rather than just the two. jonathan turley of george washington university, always a pleasure, john. thanks for bearing with us. >> thank you, keith. so the house ethics investigations of charlie rangel and maxine waters and all the others, all of them, coincidentally enough, african-american, do you know who the supposedly outside neutral authority is who recommends ethics cases be investigated, george w. bush's most infamous cia director, that's who. that's who. gene robinson next on "countdown." rewards visa card. pack your marriott get triple points every time you use your card at marriott. apply now and earn 22,500 bonus points when you use your card and enjoy a free night stay. so, before you know it, work time becomes well-deserved downtime. apply now at marriott.com/freenightstay. you've got staying power. nationwide insurance, hit me. i love for an insurance company to be there for me before i actually need them.
1:16 am
you mean be proactive. yeah, i guess. check your left pocket. [chuckles] nationwide insurance offers proactive insurance services because they want to be there for you before you need them. proactive, like magic.
1:17 am
funny, huh? eight congressional investigations of eight congress people and all eight were african-american. on day 106, this t-shirt briefly eclipses the continuing chaos in the gulf. the tea party, it's not just about hats, it's about who owns the hat. now they've fired the guy with the drum. and the free press versus the free pass. sharron angle's demand -- only ask me questions i want asked. on of three good probiotics in phillips' colon health defended against the bad gas, diarrhea and constipation.
1:18 am
...and? it helped balance her colon. oh, now that's the best part. i love your work. [ female announcer ] phillips' colon health.
1:19 am
members of congress who spend their days arranging meetings for donors and constituents, raising money for themselves or other causes in their districts, as well as currying favor with members of the administration. in our fourth story, what sounds like business as usual for what could be any one of 435 elected representatives in the house now coming under intense scrutiny from a democratically controlled congress that had promised to clean up ethics issues. but so far, targeting only two lawmakers with actual charges, both of them african-american. the house ethics committee announcing charges against democratic congress woman, maxine waters of california, for her role in arranging a meeting in september 2008, between treasury secretary paulison and one united bank of boston, of which her husband is a former director, and in which he owned $250,000 in stock. the office of congressional
1:20 am
ethics, an independent board, having initiated the case against miss waters, including that on august 22, 2008, one united bank seeking the congresswoman's help in contacting treasury officials about potential losses the bank was facing on investments in the mortgage agencies fannie mae and freddie mac. september 9th, one united executives meeting with treasury officials as arranged by ms. waters. the bank asking for $50 million in bailout funds, the amount of money it lost in the government's takeover of fannie mae and freddie mac. also in september, miss waters disclosing to barney frank that she has a potential conflict of interest because of her husband's role as a stockholder and former member of the board. his advice to the congresswoman, stay out of it. it is unclear whether this conversation happened before or after the meeting took place. december 19th, treasury approving $12.1 million in t.a.r.p. funds for one united. in a statement, waters saying that she has not violated any house rules, that the case against her has no merit, that the office of congressional ethics has drawn negative
1:21 am
inferences where there are none and twisted facts to fill its faulty conclusions and that she plans to fight the charges in a public hearing. and because her charges come as fellow democrat charlie rangel of new york is mired in his own ethics investigation, ms. waters taking to the airways this afternoon, including al sharpton's show, to say she was standing up for a minority-owned bank and is now being attacked for that. reverend sharpton questioning whether the investigations, plural, were designed to undermine the confidence that african-americans have in their elected leaders. politico pointing out that at one point this year, all eight lawmakers under investigation by the house ethics committee, including rangel and waters, were black democrats. a member of the congressional black caucus questioning whether the process for investigating claims is fair, saying anonymously, quote, this is stacked against you, once an accusation is made, you're guilty until proven otherwise. time now to call in our eugene robinson, an associate editor and pulitzer prize-winning columnist for "the washington post." gene, good evening. >> good evening, keith.
1:22 am
>> even if business as usual is no longer business as usual on capitol hill, it is hard to believe that maxine waters is the only member of congress who might have arranged a questionable meeting as the banks were scrambling for the t.a.r.p. funds and for their lives, and that charlie rangel is the only member of congress who's raised funds for an educational center that bears his own name. >> it's impossible to believe either of those things, actually, keith. clearly, members of congress were running around lobbying, trying to get t.a.r.p. funds for institutions they thought needed t.a.r.p. funds. and i'm not aware of a member of congress with the record and seniority of charlie rangel, who, in fact, has not tried to leave some sort of legacy as an educational center or an institute or something like that. so these things are not uncommon. what's different now, of course, is the atmosphere, the democrats vowed to crack down on
1:23 am
corruption or appearance of corruption. there's this new office of congressional ethics and nancy pelosi has cracked the whip. >> let's talk about that office for a second. because it is the piece de resistance here and it may transcend any racial issue. the cochair of the office of congressional ethics, which as you pointed out, a somewhat new independent board, recommends whether or not there should be an investigation is porter goss, the former cia director, and as background, in 2005, which is not a long time ago, and after he served in congress, where he had a fairly dubious reputation to begin, he approved the destruction of dozens of cia's videotapes which recorded the interrogation, the brutal interrogation of two of the detainees. how does porter goss get to sit in judgment and decide whether or not to investigate anybody's ethical conduct? yours, mine, maxine water's, or some guy walking -- somebody living on the street out here? >> you're sensing a kind of
1:24 am
physician heal thyself or takes one to know one kind of situation here, keith. >> something. >> and i did one outgrowth of this discussion and others like it this week is going to be a lot more scrutiny of this new office and how it works, what its powers are. and you know, i'm looking forward to hearing the detailed rebuttal that maxine waters has to offer. we do have a response from congressman rangel and it's quite fulsome. so, yeah, let's learn a bit more about this new board. >> statistically, obviously, if there were eight investigations in the course of the year and all eight were of white milquetoast congressmen and congresswomen from the middle of the country or from three states, there would be no flag raised and nobody would say well, statistically, that seems pretty unlikely.
1:25 am
statistically, doesn't this set of arrangements here, these eight investigations, don't they seem, just on their face, unlikely? is there a construction as which you see them being something other than a coincidence? >> well, what, african-americans are, what, 20% of the democratic caucus, i think. you could -- it's the old thing, you know, you flip a coin 100 times and you could get eight in a row heads, but this isn't, you know, it's 20% of the caucus as opposed to 50% of the caucus and to say nothing of the whole congress. so it seems -- i've never been accused of being a statistician, it seems like something of an anomaly. but this is not a new complaint by african-american members of congress. we've heard in years past that they feel they're under greater scrutiny and held to a higher standard. >> all right. i still don't see the statistics, whether you and i do our math correctly or not, i don't see it possibly being just random chance.
1:26 am
but in any event, gene robinson of "the washington post" and msnbc. as always, gene, great thanks. >> good to be here, keith. so three communications directors in one campaign in one week. i'm thinking this means a problem of some kind. can you guess which senate candidate has set this dubious record tonight, ahead on "countdown."
1:27 am
1:28 am
1:29 am
static kill, static videotape. in other words, is the video feed from the gulf floor a rerun? first, the sanity break. last night, the president of the united commercial fisherman's
1:30 am
association said his group is now reduced to making money out of selling t-shirts. the money raised from sales to benefit gulf fisherman whose businesses have been devastated by the disaster. we have a link now on our website, countdown@msnbc.com, or you can e-mail them directly to shop@leanweb.org. and there are not swear words on the other side, just art. let's play oddball. germany, guten tag. the cutest animals to hit a german zoo since knut arrived. four rare white tigers were unveiled today. they're adorable and sleepy. all four cubs are doing well and waiting to be put in with the other tigers. they'll be raised there until they fulfill their destiny by joining siegfried and roy. let's check in on england's coalition government, the gorilla is celebrating her 50th
1:31 am
birthday. she has eight offspring, all of whom who have moved away and never call anymore, so the zookeepers decided to throw her a party. they had presents full of treats inside of her enclosure and waited for her to arrive. and the results? no, the treats are inside, inside the box. well, if you took them out of the box, they wouldn't be crunchy, would they? gorilla for sale. finally, to portugal, where some local boy scouts have taken the term soap box derby back to its literal intentions. instead of traditional vehicles made of boards of plywood, these amateur racers have gone a step further. the only requirement is that the vehicle be powered by foot. braking by foot, however, was just for showing off. yabaa, dabbaa, do! >> that is exactly the kind of technology we have employed in the gulf. relief wells out. jamming in mud, back in.
1:32 am
bob cavnar joins us next.
1:33 am
1:34 am
1:35 am
once again, we have expanded our language at the trivial expense of just a little oil in the gulf of mexico. static kill. our third story in the countdown, after allowing 5 million barrels of oil to poison the ocean, bp is once again putting its hopes into a glorified injection of mud. the obvious question is, will it work? perhaps the more important one is, how will we know? in a moment, bob cavnar will join us. tests earlier in the day prompting bp to go ahead with its critical so-called static kill effort, in which once again heavy drilling mud is pumped into the top of the well. the operation intended to help plug the unstable well. it was sealed with a temporary cap last month. it could last, the operation, that is, until thursday. engineers won't know for more than a week if the procedure worked. and while bp maintains static kill may be enough to seal the well, retired coast guard admiral thad allen, who's in charge there, insists the gusher will have to be plugged from two different points. the yet to be finished relief wells will be used to execute a
1:36 am
so-called bottom kill. more mud and cement will be injected into bedrock 2 1/2 miles below the sea floor. this as new estimates are out at the bp price tag. the company could be fined as much as $21 billion if it is found to have committed gross negligence or willful misconduct. the fine could drop to $17.6 billion if the government credits the company for the oil it has already recovered. joining us once again tonight, former oil executive, bob cavnar, who writes about the industry at dailyhurricane.com. he's also author of "disaster on the horizon," which is due out in october. good evening, bob. >> hi, keith. >> static kill. where did this one come from? have we heard of this before? it gets confusing sometimes. >> well, that's the latest part of the most recent shape shift of bp. when admiral allen compelled bp to go ahead with the capping stack, you'll remember that they came up with this well integrity test that ran for -- supposed to
1:37 am
be for six to 48 hours, ended up running for two weeks. and then we started hearing about the static kill, where they wanted to try to kill the well from the top again. so that actually started this morning after a lot of discussion about whether that's actually the right thing to do, and it's one that i actually disagree with what they're doing right now. >> what happened with the relief wells that have been portrayed until the last few days, as the ultimate solution. no matter what else you did, if you got those relief wells, you would be sure that this thing would be mastered? >> this is the one thing i just don't understand, keith. these relief wells, one is just standing by in case the first one doesn't work. i understand that. this deepest relief well is only four feet from the intercept point. they have to drill about another 100 feet to intercept. they're right there and they've lost three weeks of operations due to first this well integrity test, then, of course, there was
1:38 am
a tropical storm, which nobody could help, but now we're sitting, circulating, doing nothing, waiting on this static kill that's going on now. had they just kept going, i think they could have already had the well killed instead of doing all this nonsense from the top. >> and the prospects, as you said, it's going to be a while before we have any idea if the static kill has worked. what is the definition of success and how is it to be determined? >> well, the way kent wells described it in his very brief briefing today was that they think it's successful if there's zero pressure on the well. and that's the classic definition for a killed well, is one where you have zero pressure showing on the wellhead. of course, here, since it's in 5,000 feet of water, there's going to be hydrostatic pressure, but that pressure on the very top of the well should read zero. but having said that, you don't know if that well's actually killed down below, because all the damage down below, it could be flowing into another zone. it could be flowing someplace else into the substrata.
1:39 am
the only way you kill this well is with the relief well from down below. >> is there danger in that mud? it's nicely described as mud, that's not mud, it's drilling mud. is there a danger to this the way the corexit turned out to be such a danger? >> you know, the corexit dispersant is highly toxic. in fact, it's more toxic than the crude oil itself. drilling mud, in itself, the vast majority of it are fairly inert minerals, but they do run things like caustic soda and other chemicals in it that could be toxic. so if it gets on the ocean floor, it can have effect on the sea life there. >> that video feed, given how much we've been lied to in the last 106 days, do we know that that's legit, and is there anyone with any motive to make it not legit? >> you know, it was very interesting. i got up early this morning and i've been working on the book and the feed stays up on the screen all the time. and i watched -- as i was very concerned about this connector that i've been talking about for the last couple of weeks and they had a good shot of that. and i watched that for a while,
1:40 am
turned back to my book, came back about 30 minutes later, and it replayed. and i noticed that the time was an hour and a half behind the current time. so they were re-running -- they were re-looping some of the video feed and it was not live. >> any idea why? >> you know, i always wondered if they want you to see what they want you to see and sometimes if they have something else going on, they'll just loop the tape for a while before they go back to live. >> well, you know, put on "the three stooges," something interesting and fitting to the occasion. bob cavnar of "the daily hurricane" and working on the book on this subject, good luck with both and thanks for time tonight. >> great talking to you, keith. >> to help gulf coast residents, this reminder. we're still raising funds for two-day free health clinic in new orleans coinciding with the fifth anniversary of hurricane katrina. august 31st and september 1st. the address is freeclinics.us. and don't forget tomorrow's clinic in washington. one step away from the senate and she doesn't understand that a, quote, free press does not mean her personal free publicity service.
1:41 am
i would like you to the meet john and mel, tea partiers with a difference. and what a difference! they broke up the band, man. and when rachel joins you at the top of the hour, the tea party wants to know your story of losing your job to an illegal. she wants you to know what they have done to you on their, quote, safe online forum, unquote. ben and his family live here, too. ben's a re/max agent, and he's a big part of this community. there are lots of reasons why re/max agents average more sales than other agents. experience, certainly. but maybe it's also because they care about the markets they serve and the neighbors who rely on them. nobody sells more real estate than re/max. visit remax.com today. sure, but let me get a little infortion first. for broccoli, say on for toys, say two. ys ! the system can't process your response at this time.
1:42 am
what ? please call back between 8 and 5 ceral standard time. he's in control. gobye. even kids ow it's wrong to give someone the run around. at ally bank you never have to deal with an endless automated system. yocan talk to a real person 24/7. it's just the right thing to do. ♪ [ male announcer ] we make them beautiful. ♪ we make them tougher. ♪ we make them legendary. we make them better... ♪ to make your life better. ♪ and we've never made one... quite like this. the 100% electric nissan leaf. ♪ about this "dedicated claims rep" thing. okay, well... calling yourselves "dedicated"? we're all dedicated, okay? the entire web site team worked late every night this week. look at sanjeev. he's a mess!
1:43 am
what? no... guys, we're called dedicated claims reps because we each stay with an esurance customer throughout the automobile claims process. it's not because we think we work harder than you. well, you don't. [ sanjeev ] am i a mess? [ joey ] you slept in the vending machine. [ male announcer ] call today or go to esurance.com. sharron angle is happy to take your questions, provided they are actually her questions. first, no, this is not your water coming to a boil, it's our nightly check up on the something for nothing crowd. it's tea time. historians may little note or remember what they said here, but clearly the tea party has left an indelible legacy of dressing up in funny hats. rachel told you last night, while wearing a funny hat, about the new trend at colonial williamsburg. people asking the actors playing the founding fathers about the political issues of today. and some of them, seeming to be surprised to learn, that those are actors. then there was the alabama tea party maroon running for congress on what appeared to be a platform of "i see dead founding fathers in hats."
1:44 am
in a short burst of common sense, mr. barber here got his clock cleaned in the primary. but now we move to the liberty leaders. two men who formed one of those little side shows at tea party events, until you realize that tea party events are nothing but sideshows. they run a fife and drum band. their names are john and mel. they just broke up. because in the primary for sheriff of larimer county, colorado, mr. hildenberg supported the conservative candidate, but mr. wine supported the very conservative candidate. pfeiffer wine has now fired the drummer because he owned the fife and the drums and the costumes. and presumably, his green polo shirt. and most importantly, because he also owned the hats! without the. no pills, no pain. how can you get pain relief without taking pills around the clock? try thermacare heatwraps, for all day relief without pills.
1:45 am
i was surprised, thermacare worked all day. you feel the heat. and it relaxes and unlocks the muscle. you've got to try it. [ man ] thermacare, more effective for back pain than the maximum dose of acetaminophen, the medicine in tylenol. go to thermacare.com today for a $3 off coupon. thermacare. no pills. no pain. just relief.
1:46 am
the senate candidate who wants reporters to only ask the questions the candidate wants to answer so they'll report the news the way the candidate wants it to be reported. see if you can guess who that might be. that's next. first, time for tonight's "worst persons" in the world. brought to you by -- lonesome rhodes brand foolproof dog fence, official electric wireless fence of glenn beck's desecration of the memory of dr. martin luther king, august 28th. the lonesome rhodes brand dog fence. it always works. [ barking ]
1:47 am
>> the bronze again to tom shails of "the washington post." you'll recall he take a look at this clip from the christiane amanpour edition of "this week" and then asked, does she mean to suggest that our mourning extend to members of the taliban. >> we remember all of those who died in war this week, and the pentagon released the names of 11 u.s. service members killed in afghanistan. >> after a deluge of criticism over his delusion that that was an extension of american mourning to the taliban, shales decided to take the course of, you don't understand me, so i'll yell louder. in an online chat today, "this portion of the program had traditionally included the names of u.s. servicemen and women who had given their lives for their country. now suddenly amanpour decided it should be a tribute to all those who died in any wars, and presumably that would include those who died fighting against the united states as well as for
1:48 am
it. which i think is taking it too far. if this were 1943, we would hardly think it appropriate to mourn nazi casualties." well, it's not 1943, and now that he's already gone to the mourn nazi casualties card, something aaron barnhart blogged about today, shales isn't even right about what he implies the way american service losses were mourned on the pre-amanpour version this week. >> this week the pentagon released the names of five service members killed in afghanistan. >> jake tappert didn't say just americans, either. he must be one of tom shails' nazi mourners too. the runner up, marc thiessen, the simplistic former speech writer now writing in "the washington post." doesn't like wickileaks. has a solution, kidnapping and rendition of julian assange. assange is a non-u.s. citizen,
1:49 am
operating outside the territory of the united states, this means the government has a wide range of options for dealing with him. it can employ of only law enforcement but also intelligence and military assets to bring assange to justice. the united states should then work with its international law enforcement partners to apprehend and extradite him. if they refuse, the united states can arrest assange on their territory without their acknowledge or approval. asked then how to deal with lebron james leaving cleveland for miami, he suggested kidnapping and rendition. and our winner, think about this guy for a while, jason anthony brown, arrested in ft. walton beach, florida. he and an unidentified woman had agreed to go out on a date at the olive garden on the miracle strip parkway. mr. brown allegedly greeted the lady in her car and joined her inside of it. that's when, she says, he pulled out his gun and demanded her money. she says she gave mr. brown, her date, 90 bucks. he got out of the car, left on foot. she drove the hell out of there
1:50 am
as quickly as she could. this is already bad enough. but what mr. brown then did transports this to a new level. police say he took her $90 and then went into the olive garden and had dinner! jason anthony brown -- i want to know about the tip -- today's worst person in the world! waking up with morning pain can drain the energy right out of you. fight it with new... it combines extra strength bayer aspirin to treat pain plus an alertness aid to help you get off to a running start. try bayer am the morning pain reliever.
1:51 am
1:52 am
1:53 am
speaking to the nevada republican men's club last night, republican senate candidate sharron angle promised the crowd she would take gop filibustering to new heights if elected. "i guarantee that i can talk most anything to death." in our number one story, anything, including her own campaign.
1:54 am
angle's latest verbal overshare, she has blown the whistle on her campaign collusion with right-wing media, especially fox news, during an interview with fox news. since her primary victory in june, angle's media strategy has been apparent, although perhaps not thought out. she does interviews with outlets that are politically sympathetic to her, and when the local news asks questions, she literally runs or trots away. sunday, fox news aired a taped profile of candidates in the nevada senate race. during the spot, angle was interviewed by reporter karl cameron, who asked the candidate about her serial evasion of non-fox media. and angle explained to cameron how this interview thing is supposed to work out. >> there was a tremendous amount of discussion about sharron angle's taking a defensive posture. >> we needed to have the press be our friend. >> wait a minute, hold on a second. to be your friend? >> well, truly -- >> that sounds naive. >> well, no, we wanted them to ask the questions that we want to answer so they report the news the way we want it to be reported. and when i get on a show and say, send money to
1:55 am
sharronangle.com, so your listeners will know, if they want to support me, they need to go to sharronangle.com. >> that doesn't sound fair and balanced. it would be naive if it wasn't exactly what was happening. >> well, first of all, neil, it's great to be on your show to talk about this campaign against harry reid, the 25 million, i've been saying i only need one million people to send $25 to sharronangle.com. >> i need one million people to send that to sharronangle.com. >> you may not be able to vote for me, but you can send money to sharronangle.com. >> you're good at the website. >> not so good at the communications director. the one who oversaw the cameron interview kicked upstairs after six whole days on the job. a new relief director has been brought in from california to plug the propaganda spill. time to call in msnbc contributor, dave weigel. dave, good evening. >> good evening, keith. >> so she won't talk to media who won't give her a pass, or she doesn't know the difference
1:56 am
between the free press and the free pass? >> well, she's actually started to talk to more press, i think, because she's getting comfortable with this line of weird medi-questioning about her unavailability. she actually, according to the the review journal, opened up her speech by being a little out of breath and saying, i'm so tired, i've been running from the press so much, and ended up talking to a couple reporters afterwards. this isn't really a problem for her. what she's saying about how she handles the media is what tea party supporters would like their candidates to say. they don't trust most of the media that's not fox news or the christian broadcasting network, et cetera. they don't mind she's doing this. >> on the other hand, somebody must mind it, because they made another change in communications directors today, and this will be three in seven days. the other guy lasted six days and was kicked upstairs. what exactly is a communications director supposed to do with a candidate who has this bit already down pat? and what does it mean when you've had three in one week?
1:57 am
>> she's actually on message. she's been saying the same thing for weeks. i talked to the communications director, had this sort of short tenure on the job, and they found this guy who had a lot of experience. he was going to work somewhere else. he was available now. let's take that for granted, because she's not actually doing anything that she considers a gaffe, really. for her to tell fox news that she wants everyone to give her money, yeah, we all laugh at this little clip, but fox news aired the clip of her saying she wanted people to give her money. and according to the campaign, they're raising enough to be on the air to compete with harry reid for the rest of the campaign. i mean, i think is it liberace who said he was laughing all the way to the bank. i think that's what she's doing here. >> is she? because, obviously, the day she was nominated, she was significantly, or at least, three or four points ahead beyond the margin of error if i remember correctly, ahead of harry reid. >> well, as much as 11 points. >> but now she's down by four. where is this trending, do we know?
1:58 am
>> well, again, they think they have enough money, but reid is running this semi-classic incumbent who's not very popular strategy of just bombarding his opponent. and he has more to go on than they usually do. remember, chris christie beat jon corzine after having his negatives raised, but christie didn't go as far out on a limb as angle did on things like yucca -- well, there's no yucca mountain in new jersey. that helps. but social security, what government organizations to abolish, whether god wanted him to run for office or not. reid has so much material that they're going to keep hitting this. the sense is, she took a race that should be a republican gimme, turned it into a toss-up, and hasn't yet broadcast a strategy to pull it out of that. >> that raises that last question, which is if the -- supposedly it's the gop, one of the national organizations, forgive me for not knowing off the top of my head which one, that sent in this latest communications director. surely, somebody, if she thinks she's on message, somebody in republican hierarchy thinks she's not. how does that play out?
1:59 am
>> i -- there's a lot of worry about this. when she won the nomination, clearly she thinks she's own message. she's just not saying republicans want a candidate to say in a marquee race. six months ago, they thought this guy was toast, harry reid. they want to run an emergency mission without looking like they're running an emergency mission. that's happening. but she started to get feedback at rallies now from people who think she's blowing it and that's affecting it. >> it may not be subtle if you have three communication directors in a week. dave, thanks. >> thank you, keith. >> that's "countdown" for august 33rd. a california court will issue an order to pr
left
right